In this essay Pojman makes a case against the kind of ethical egoism defended by such thinkers as Thomas Hobbes and Ayn Rand. Appealing to the paradox of egoism, he distinguishes between two levels of thinking about the self. On a higher (tier 2) level, a person legitimately concerns him- or herself with prospects for his or her happiness, but, in so reflecting, he or she rationally concludes that the best way to realize happiness on an everyday (tier 1) level is to develop a strong (nonegoistic) disposition toward altruism. Limited, reciprocal altruism offers us the best chance for happiness.
-Pojman accuses Rand of committing the fallacy of false dilemma.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Pojman critiques ethical egoism by highlighting the paradox of egoism and argues that a rational reflection on self-interest leads to the conclusion that altruism, particularly limited, reciprocal altruism, is the most effective path to happiness. This critique includes the accusation that Ayn Rand commits the fallacy of false dilemma by presenting ethical egoism and altruism as the only options, ignoring the possibility of a nuanced middle ground that includes elements of both.

In This Essay Pojman Makes a Case Against the Kind